$15 Billion Unaccounted for in Iraq

[Annie]

I don't think he cares if you reply to him or not. He's just pointing out that you're ignorant beyond belief. It's merely observation.... an accurate one, but observation nonetheless.

No need for you to respond. We can all observe the same thing.

Exactly, this poster is not worth responding to. What has happened in the short time he's been here, both those on the left and right have found him ignorant of events, his interpretations of events, and his comments on such. No one finds his posts a source of debate or illuminating, rather it's 'him' that is the issue.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Exactly, this poster is not worth responding to. What has happened in the short time he's been here, both those on the left and right have found him ignorant of events, his interpretations of events, and his comments on such. No one finds his posts a source of debate or illuminating, rather it's 'him' that is the issue.

You want to make a serious accusation?

Then prove it with specific examples of me being "ignorant" of events. The quote function is a remarkable tool. Use it to substantiate your bizarre claims. Or do not and remain the slouch you appear to be.

It takes a silly lazy person all of two seconds to make such a general accusation towards another poster like the one you have made above.

Not only is it clearly fallacious to accept the perceived "approval of the majority" as evidence for a claim but it is downright elementary and is indicative of a cheater.

 

[Paulie]

"Remember our troops are taught to be soldiers not accountants."

You do realize that military members attend a career-specific training school after Basic, right?

That would include accounting, should that be the MOS or AFSC you chose during enlistment. If you chose finance, you learn finance in your tech school. If you choose firefighter, you are trained to fight fires. If you choose cook, you are trained to cook.

 

[Gunny]

There should never be a Blackwater or anything like it in this country.

As for the volunteer army, it isn't the problem. They do their jobs just fine for the most part. The problem comes from a) the sorry task they were asked to undertake (and which they seem to have done to the best of their ability); and b) the over-rotation of troops.

Blackwater is a private security firm. They provide a service. They also have a sorry task and accomplish it the best way they know how.

The troops are only over-rotated when compared to peacetime service. Prior to Vietnam, troops served for the duration. When compared to THAT, they've got it pretty easy.

A larger military force would help alleviate the PersTempo as well as redploying assets we have manning obsolete, Cold War bases.

What would actually work best IMO is to phase in the Iraqi army and correspondingly phase ours out.

 

[Gunny]

You want to make a serious accusation?

Then prove it with specific examples of me being "ignorant" of events. The quote function is a remarkable tool. Use it to substantiate your bizarre claims. Or do not and remain the slouch you appear to be.

It takes a silly lazy person all of two seconds to make such a general accusation towards another poster like the one you have made above.

Not only is it clearly fallacious to accept the perceived "approval of the majority" as evidence for a claim but it is downright elementary and is indicative of a cheater.

The all volunteer army has been a disaster. The corporate business like structure of the U.S. army is a disgrace and a cancer.

It has led to intense corruption,malignant stupidity and outright theft.

Oh look ... THAT was sure hard.

Flat talking out you ass and proving your ignorance right there.

 

[Gunny]

Use that big brain and take a hint.

I will not, under any circumstances talk, engage in, or debate you expect to remind you, that you're a waste of time.

YOU take a hint junior. I don't care whether or not you respond to me. We've already established the fact you have nothing of value to say anyway.

I DO get a kick out of you responding to me telling me you aren't going to respond to me. How old are you? 8?

If anyone is a waste of time, I'm seriously considering looking to see how much bandwidth your drivel is wasting.

 

[Nate Peele]

The war costs $720,000,000 per day. $15,000,000,000 is chump change. That's like barely 20 days of fighting.

 

[Toro]

The war costs $720,000,000 per day. $15,000,000,000 is chump change. That's like barely 20 days of fighting.

Well, that's reassuring.

I'm gonna get in on the gravy train, then. Ripping off the American taxpayers under the guise of fighting Islamofascists is a lucrative business.

 

[jillian]

The war costs $720,000,000 per day. $15,000,000,000 is chump change. That's like barely 20 days of fighting.

Of course that makes it all okay as they line their pockets and people like you bemoan giving money to education, health, or any other socially beneficial program.

 

[Gunny]

Of course that makes it all okay as they line their pockets and people like you bemoan giving money to education, health, or any other socially beneficial program.

It isn't okay. At the same time, it is understandable. It's the age-old conflict of beancounters vs field troops. Things get "relocated." They aren't stolen in the sense of the word because troops are actually using the items for their intended purpose.

But when unit X needs so many widgets and their Table of Equipment (T/E) that is based on some bookworm's numbers from 30 years ago says they don't rate, Eggbert the boxkicker isn't going to procure for them, nor release to them said equipment. Hence the term "relocated."

It's a vicious cycle. THose boxkickers and beancounters act like the equipment is their personal belongings and no way are they going to let us dumb grunts get ahold of and subsequently destroy it.

On their side of the coin, when the chair-polishing IG comes around to Supply, they better account for each and every item, and will be failed on the inspection if the paperwork's so much as filled out incorrectly.

The intent of the inspection -- serviceability and accountability -- got lost in the bureaucracy or zero defect mentality long ago.

Then, as opposed to the blanket condemnations made by a certain uneducated twit, there ARE criminals in the military. The military is a microcosm of our society, and the criminal element is represented as well as others.

Equipment is also flat-out destroyed. The ME is a hostile environment to machinery. So is the stress of being used in tactical/combat situations. So is just being plain-old blown up. When something breaks down on a mission and it does not compromise the conduct of that mission, it gets left behind and maybe gets pucked back up.

This is by no means all-inclusive, nor meant to be definitive. It just gives a general idea of some things can happen. There's also civilian theft, the equipment could be sitting on a dock in Okinawa (not unheard of), or just about anything else that could possibly happen to it.

While it may indicate a lack of perfection on the part of the US military, and a system that could be more efficient, it by no means supports any of the crap the aforementioned twit spews forth anytime someone posts "US military."

 

[BrianH]

Are you going to sit there and agree to call me names?

Or are you going to put your money where your mouth is and discuss the actual issue?

Tell me where your point of contention is, and I will respond to it appropriately.

Calling me names, making broad accusations or agreeing with someone else hurling insults does nothing - I repeat - nothing to enhance any legitimate criticism you might have of my posts.

Throwing insults expose a member of message board with no class, no values and a shrewd hostility towards substantive discourse.

Either discuss the issue and bring serious arguments to the table; or go about your day thinking calling another poster names qualifies as serious discussion.

It's really up to you.

Hmmm..... Let's see, If you compare an all-volunteer army (those that want to be there) with an all draft army (includes many more who don't want to be there) you'll find that the all-volunteer army functions more efficiently. I'd like to see you try and order someone around who doesn't want to be ordered around. No offense to the Vietnam vets, but this was a problem during the Vietnam drafts. You had alot of AWOLS, and alot of conscripted soldiers that didn't give a crap about completing their mission. I wouldn't be against a draft in the event of another large-scale World War in which numbers were needed, but the all-volunteer army has not been a disaster.

Me thinks TGS is an ignorant KID who has fallacious ideas....
My legitimate criticism of your posts is that you have no evidence to back up your conclusions. And the information you "think" backs up your conclusion really doesn't back it up. You've posted this nonsense before, and backed it up with information about decisions NOT made by the military (which leads most to believe that it is not the military doing a bad job, but the politicians.) I hate to say it again TGS, but it is blatantly obvious that you have no knowledge about how the military works and functions.

Your insinuation of your own knowledge would make as much sense as me trying to tell you about the town in Canada that you live in.

 

[BrianH]

You want to make a serious accusation?

Then prove it with specific examples of me being "ignorant" of events. The quote function is a remarkable tool. Use it to substantiate your bizarre claims. Or do not and remain the slouch you appear to be.

It takes a silly lazy person all of two seconds to make such a general accusation towards another poster like the one you have made above.

Not only is it clearly fallacious to accept the perceived "approval of the majority" as evidence for a claim but it is downright elementary and is indicative of a cheater.

PROOF OF TGS IGNORANCE LISTED BELOW:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/search.php?searchid=613886

"The all volunteer army has been a disaster. The corporate business like structure of the U.S. army is a disgrace and a cancer. It has led to intense corruption,malignant stupidity and outright theft. "

http://www.usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?p=691960#post691960

"You should really research history as written by those who are most qualified to form authoratative conclusions."

"I have never, will never make or have made any misrepresentation."

"Certainly I will explain. First off, let me repeat myself. The AVA (all volunteer army) has been a disaster for America. I don't say this to "bash" anyone. I am simply exercising my opinion based off of the personal research I have done into the issue."

"Yes, there has been "proof."

First, remember that there is no "proof" in science -- that is a property of mathematics"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=53013&page=3

This is just a taste of TGS's ignorance. Many are with a definate sense of irony.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Hmmm..... Let's see, If you compare an all-volunteer army (those that want to be there) with an all draft army (includes many more who don't want to be there) you'll find that the all-volunteer army functions more efficiently. I'd like to see you try and order someone around who doesn't want to be ordered around. No offense to the Vietnam vets, but this was a problem during the Vietnam drafts.

I don't know what most of the crap you posted has to do with the topic and I'll even ignore your pathetic attempts to "smear" me on the internet and therefore turn the thread into a pissing contest about "The GoodShepherd."

No need to reply to the actions of a juvenile obsessed with an internet poster on a political message board. Not worth the time.

What I will do, what I always do is stick to the issue. I'll just bold the most relevant parts and fire away.

Your claim is that an all volunteer army "functions" more efficiently. Of course, the evidence concludes the opposite and the move towards privatization of the U.S. armed forces remains a dangerous path to tread.

It is far more expensive to operate an all volunteer army than it would be to operate its opposite of equal size. Furthermore, there is also "less control."

Outsourced private armies, by and large, operate under their own rules and charge taxpayers exorbitant prices for their services: far more than it would cost the U.S. government.

 

[BrianH]

I don't know what most of the crap you posted has to do with the topic and I'll even ignore your pathetic attempts to "smear" an me on the internet.

No need to reply to the actions of a juvenile obsessed with an internet poster on a political message board. Not worth the time.

What I will do, what i always do is stick to the issue. I'll just bold the most relevant parts.

Your claim is that an all volunteer army "functions" more efficiently. Of course, the evidence concludes the opposite.

It is far more expensive to operate an all volunteer army than it would be to operate its opposite of equal size. Furthermore, there is also "less control". Outsourced private armies, by and large, operate under their own rules and charge taxpayers exorbitant prices for their services: far more than it would cost the U.S. government.

I'll go ahead and bold your ridiculous remarks. The mistake you make is in not coming to the realization is that OUTSOURCED PRIVATE ARMIES are PRIVATE, and not creations of or controlled by the U.S. military. You're evidence isn't evidence at all, it's information that you've applied to a incorrect conclusion. How does outsourced PRIVATE armies have anything to do with the U.S military and it's functions. I've got news for you, Blackwater and other private armies are not considered the U.S. military. No more than a vigilante is considered a police officer.

As far as control. You couldnt' be more assinine. When it comes to control, compare the behavior of a group of high school students (forced to be in school) with that of a group of college students (who want to be there). See what the difference is. If you dont' want to work where you work, you'll do a crappier job at it...it's basic psychology. If you fill an army full of people who don't want to be there, they will perform ineffectively.....

As far as pathetic attempts to smear you on the internet. I'd change your word choicing to successful attempts portray you for the ass-eater that you are. You gave Kathianne a hard time about not posting proof of your ignorance, so I obliged your complaint by doing so....

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

How does outsourced PRIVATE armies have anything to do with the U.S military and it's functions.

The "all volunteer" model relies on a steadily and increasingly "outsourcing" of jobs to private companies in an effort, proponents claim, to save Uncle Sam money.

The GAO made far different conclusions in it's reports. The push towards privatization has largely failed. Corruption, theft and rogue behaviour permeates throughout the Armed forces representing America. The all volunteer model has fostered a poisonous atmosphere, in fact even encouraged it.

The outsourcing of traditional military jobs to private armies is very much a part of the "vision" of the all volunteer army: to charge US taxpayers outrageous prices while proclaiming this great scam is actually saving the US money.

I call B.S. when I see it.

And the "all volunteer army" is a total scam.

 

[BrianH]

The "all volunteer" model relies on steadily and increasingly "outsourcing" jobs to private companies in an effort to save Uncle Sam money.

The outsourcing of traditional military jobs to private armies is very much a part of the vision of the all volunteer army.

Says the guy who claimed in another thread that Private outsourced armies are being paid for by tax-payers??? How is this saving Uncle Sam money again. keep talking in circles dude.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Says the guy who claimed in another thread that Private outsourced armies are being paid for by tax-payers???

Who do you think the "private" armies send the bill to Brian?

They send it to the U.S. government obviously Brian and my whole point is that "all volunteer" model does not save the US government money. Are you finally catching on? It turned out to resemble a disaster.

A little slow today, are we?

Did you have your coffee?

 

[BrianH]

Who do you think the "private" armies send the bill to Brian?

They send it to the U.S. government obviously Brian and my whole point is that "all volunteer" model does not save the US government money. Are you finally catching on? It turned out to resemble a disaster.

A little slow today, are we?

Did you have your coffee?

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DECISIONS OF OR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE U.S. MILITARY (based on its own decisiosn or functioning) ALL OF THE PROBLEMS YOU SUGGEST ARE NOT COMING FRMO THE MILITARY. I may have not had coffee this morning, but it's obvious that you've definately had too much of something....

 

[AllieBaba]

When will that light click on inside your head and demand you stop seeking a reply from me? How many posts and threads has it been now, where quoting me as if I would ever reply.

Use that big brain and take a hint.

I will not, under any circumstances talk, engage in, or debate you expect to remind you, that you're a waste of time.

I will never reply to you in any meaningful way. You have proven to be a hostile personality, valuing insults over substance and tirades over civility.

Again, stop seeking an answer from me.

You will never get it.

Er...this post is an answer, and shows you are willing to talk, engage in, or debate with him....and that you will reply to him.
And if you expect civility from people when you bash our military, you can expect to "not talk" to a lot of people.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DECISIONS OF OR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE U.S. MILITARY (based on its own decisiosn or functioning) ALL OF THE PROBLEMS YOU SUGGEST ARE NOT COMING FRMO THE MILITARY. I may have not had coffee this morning, but it's obvious that you've definately had too much of something....

Yes it certainly does. If you do not think it does, state your case. Simple as that.

The push towards privatizations remains the idea of a band of bumbling civilian and military individuals who sold the idea of the "all volunteer" army to the government as way to shed a few layers of skin.

What it really was, was a giant rip-off.

Private armies are very much a part of the armed effort of the United States. No matter what you think, when most Iraqis see a convoy carrying the insignia of Blackwater corp, they do not differentiate. They are still American to the Iraqi eyes. They're here because Washington sent them here they conclude.

These private armies are run and owned by high ranking civilian and military guys who saw the potential to make billions by fleecing US taxpayers. They had all the right friends, and all the right connections.

Like I said, private armies are very much a part of the "all volunteer" model whether you like it or not.